MacDermid v. Discover Financial Services’s Empirical Analysis
488 F.3d 721 · 2007
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently June 2025
2 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 1601 (§ 102 of the Truth in Lending Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 1637 (§ 127 of the Truth in Lending Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 1640 (§ 130 of the Truth in Lending Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 1692 (Fair Debt Collection Practices Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 7001 (Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act)
Relies on Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corporation · Conley v. Gibson · Bain v. Wells · Bennett v. City of Eastpointe · Medlin v. Allied Investment Company
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the view generally taken is that improper methods used to collect a debt may be the basis for the maintenance of an action for a mental or emotional disturbance produced thereby, or for a bodily injury or illness resulting from such mental or emotional disturbance, especially where the circumstances attending the effort to collect the claim are such as to invoke the general rule that one who wilfully or intentionally causes great emotional distress, imthout justification, is liable for such injuries.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[P]roximate cause, or legal cause, concerns a determination of whether legal liability should be imposed where cause in fact has been established. Proximate or legal cause is a policy decision made by the legislature or the courts to deny liability for otherwise actionable conduct based on considerations of logic, common sense, policy, precedent and “our more or less inadequately expressed ideas of what justice demands or of what is administratively possible and convenient.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) [C]ircumstances in which the defendant’s negligence causes delirium or insanity that results in self-destructive acts; (2) custodial settings in which the custodian knew or had reason to know that the inmate or patient might engage in self-destructive acts; and (3) special relationships, such as a physician-patient relationship, when the caregiver knows or has reason to know that the patient might engage in self-destructive acts.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.